Tuggerah Lake Estuary

8/19/2019 Tuggerah Lake Estuary

1/67

Tuggerah Lakes Estuary Management Plan 28BIO-ANALYSIS Pty Ltd: Marine, Estuarine and Freshwater EcologyOctober 2006

Figure 7. Dredging the entrance to Tuggerah Lake.

Figure 8. Disturbance to the saltmarsh and foreshore.


2/67


2.2 Water

Managing the quality and quantity of water in and entering the estuary is important for protecting long-

term estuarine health. The catchment of the estuary has undergone and will continue to undergo

significant disturbance. Increasing urbanisation has changed the quality and quantity of flows into theestuary (Figures 9 & 10). The ecological function of the rivers and estuary is influenced by the quality

and quantity of this water and aquatic communities may be at risk when these attributes of water are

significantly altered.

The Estuary Management Study set a number of objectives for managing water to aid estuarine

management (Roberts & Dickinson, 2005).

• Maintain water quality to protect healthy ecosystem function in the estuary and rivers

• Provide water quality in rivers and the estuary safe for primary human contact

• Maintain flow patterns while minimising flooding threat to life and property

• Provide adequate water for community water supply

• Minimise changes to groundwater flow/stores

Technical, Community and Business focus groups identified and prioritised the issues that make it

difficult to meet these objectives. The following issues were identified by focus groups as being the

most important out of a list of all water management issues (Roberts & Dickinson, 2005).

• Increased sediment and nutrient loads from existing land-uses affect water quality

• Increasing population puts an increased demand on water supply

• Increased sediment and nutrient loads from new development affect water quality

• Foreshore and streambank erosion adds sediment to waterways

• Toxic contaminants in runoff could affect aquatic ecology and human health

• Water supply and irrigation needs get priority over river flow for environmental needs

The following additional priorities were also identified as important:

• Risk of flooding

• Runoff from urban catchments and sewer overflows contain faecal coliforms

• Managing the ocean entrance

• Inadequate understanding of riverine ecological processes and riverine water quality to allow

for environmental flow management


3/67


Figure 9. The quality of water in the estuary is highly dependant on catchment inputs .

Figure 10. Poor catchment management leads to changes in riverine water quality.


4/67


2.3 Vegetation

There were four main hydrological areas used to group vegetation management activities which

included wetlands, estuarine, floodplain and riverine/riparian. All these vegetation communities are

significant in terms of their biodiversity and the ecological processes that occur within them (Figures11 & 12). The riverine systems flowing to the estuary have been altered to varying degrees from their

natural state, whilst the loss of riparian vegetation has greatly increasing the impact that catchment

activities have on riverine and estuarine systems.

The Estuary Management Study set a number of objectives for managing vegetation to aid estuarine

management (Roberts & Dickinson, 2005).

• Protect, maintain & restore freshwater wetland vegetation

• Protect, maintain & restore aquatic and semi-aquatic estuarine vegetation

• Protect, maintain & restore floodplain vegetation

• Protect, maintain & restore aquatic and riparian riverine vegetation


difficult to meet these objectives. The following issues were identified by focus groups as being the

most important out of a list of all vegetation management issues (Roberts & Dickinson, 2005).

• No existing plan for identifying, rehabilitating and managing significant foreshore habitats

• No active monitoring and management of important wetlands

• Activities in upstream catchments can change downstream wetlands

• Changes in water quality can affect aquatic and semi-aquatic vegetation

• Inadequate understanding of riverine ecological processes and riverine water quality to allow

for environmental flow management

• Invasive species can degrade important habitats


5/67


Figure 11. Natural foreshore vegetation is essential for a healthy estuary.

Figure 12. Wetlands provide important functions as nutrient fil ters.


6/67


2.4 Threatened Species

There are a range of human activities and disturbances that threaten the diversity of species in the

estuary (Figures 13 & 14). Management activities such as mowing of saltmarsh (now an endangered

community) and seagrass wrack collection can have impacts on important ecological processes.Degradation of habitats can affect nursery habitats and important links between the catchment and the

estuary. There are a number of environmentally significant areas in the estuary that are home to

unique communities that need protection.

The Estuary Management Study set a number of objectives for managing biodiversity and threatened

species to aid estuarine management (Roberts & Dickinson, 2005).

• The biodiversity and ecological function of the catchment shall be maintained in a manner that

protects the estuary

• Minimise human disturbances that affect ecological function

• Maintain and protect environmentally significant areas and threatened species/communities

• Ensure fishery is sustainable

The following issues were identified by the focus groups as being the most important out of a list of all

biodiversity and threatened species management issues (Roberts & Dickinson, 2005).

• Loss, fragmentation or degradation of habitat

• No ecologically sustainable target for catchment development

• Protective measures applied to development are difficult to monitor and enforce

• Assigning responsibility for managing environmentally significant areas

• Changes to flow volumes and patterns

• Human disturbance and built structures can threaten estuarine habitats

• Some local processes are threatening sensitive ecological communities and species but are

not legally defined


7/67


Figure 13. Pipefish and seahorses are protected species within the lakes.

Figure 14. Poisoned saltmarsh, a threatened ecological community in the estuary.


8/67


2.5 Land-use

The change in landuse patterns in the catchment of Tuggerah Lakes in the last 150 years has

significantly impacted the estuary. These changes have also provided opportunities for human

settlement and in doing so has been an important mechanism in the economic growth of the CentralCoast. The current landuse profile is shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Landuse distributions as a percentage of all land in the Tuggerah Lakes catchment

Land Use % Land Use %

Landuse Type %

Forestry and National Parks 37

Bushland 28

Extensive agriculture 14

Residential 10

Intensive agriculture 4

Wetlands 2

Industry/commerce 2

Turf farms/golf courses 1

Rural residential 1

Mining


9/67


• Protect and restore soil landscapes and improve understanding of land capability and

suitability in the catchment


difficult to meet these objectives. The five most important issues from the Estuary Management Study

are summarised below.

• It is difficult to monitor the activities of land managers in the catchment to determine if they are

implementing good management practices and to determine if those practices are working.

• Current programmes cannot identify and prioritise the range of erosion sites throughout the

catchment including streambanks, eroding soils and development sites.

• There is not enough information on the land capability within the catchment. That is,

developable land that is appropriately sloped land having soil types that are less likely to

erode.

• Economic/market forces tend to drive landuse changes and development. Environmental

impacts after often something that is “engineered in” after the landuse changes have been

made. There needs to be a sustainable balance of both.

• In instances where land (including streambanks etc) has been reported as eroded or at risk of

erosion, there is often insufficient funding or resources available to undertake remediation.

This means that only a limited number of sites can be managed each year.

The management of landuse in the catchment will continue to be important for managing estuarine

health, particularly given the development pressure that will be experienced in coming years. This

management plan recognises the strong links between the catchment and estuarine health. It will

recommend measures for managing the soil landscapes and land capability in areas such as

streambanks, new development sites (including roads and residential areas) and existing industries

(such as forestry and agriculture).

2.6 Socio-economic

The Tuggerah Lakes estuary is an important community asset and as such, the economic and social

value of the estuary should be maximised. In economic terms this means supporting business and

industry when it can be done without damaging the estuary. The community should be encouraged to

use the estuary (foreshores and waterways), building a greater social value for the estuary and sense

of community ownership.

2.6.1 Economic value

There is not a great deal of quantitative information on tourism and associated businesses around

Tuggerah Lakes, however it is thought that boating and recreational fishing are important for tourism


10/67


around Picnic Point and The Entrance. The open entrance is also thought to be a visual attraction for

tourists visiting The Entrance town centre. There are a number of sailing hire businesses around the

lake, notably at Toukley, Canton Beach, North Entrance and Long Jetty which would presumably be

aimed at the tourist market.

Tuggerah Lakes is the 5th largest commercial fishery in NSW and the 9th largest recreational fishery.

The Munmorah Power Station (MPS) currently operates two generating units of the original four that

were commissioned supplying 400GWh per year (about 2% of company supply and 0.6% of the State

grid). The power station is a major local employer with some 200 people employed at a cost of $3

million/year.

2.6.2 Social value

The estuarine and riverine foreshores are some of the more popular recreational areas in Wyong

Shire (Figures 15 & 16). Council has constructed a number of popular recreational areas along theseforeshores. A bike path approximately 10 km long extends from The Entrance to Chittaway Point and

is very popular for both walkers and bike riders. There are approximately 70 km of foreshores around

the estuary used for a range of activities.

Of the 52 km of foreshore in developed areas, approximately 20% is in private ownership. Some

residents have at times requested that Council assist in managing parts of their foreshore property for

aesthetic amenity. This usually relates to the removal of seagrass wrack on the foreshore and in the

lake. Council has historically taken the view that this is private property and that they should only be

managing public foreshores (Roberts and Dickinson, 2005).

The estuary has a number of lake beaches including Long Jetty and Canton Beach. Residents and

holiday-makers from the 1930’s through to the 1960’s have memories of “clean sandy beaches”

around the eastern shores of Tuggerah, Budgewoi and Lake Munmorah (Scott, 2002). These shallow

sandy shoals have experienced siltation as a result of increased runoff and sedimentation from their

catchment. Canton Beach is the most popular lakes beach and is used for swimming, sailing, paddle

boating, parasailing and prawning. Generally, swimming is not a popular recreational activity in the

estuary when compared to boating or fishing. There are no statistics available on the usage of lake

beaches over time, however anecdotal evidence suggests that there was increased use in some

locations (Long Jetty and Canton Beach) after the completion of the Restoration Project (Roberts and

Dickinson, 2005).

In terms of boating, Tuggerah Lakes tends to be more popular with small sailing craft than power

boating. Budgewoi is used for both sailing and power boating (presumably due to its more protected

waters), while Munmorah tends to be used mainly for power boating.


11/67


2.6.3 Issues and objectives

The Estuary Management Study (Roberts and Dickinson, 2005) set objectives for improving social and

economic opportunities while protecting the long-term health of the estuary. These objectives were

further enhanced by the Estuary Management Committee during the development of the Study.

• Support existing industry where it is ecologically compatible

• Ensure any new commercial venture is socially and economically justified and is ecologically

compatible with the estuary

• Provide for public access and amenity at designated beaches and in designated recreation

areas

During the development of the study, the focus groups identified a number of priority issues that would

make it difficult to meet these objectives. In priority order they were:

• Currently, there are not sufficient settlement, employment and conservation strategies that

could be used to justify or reject certain scales of development or industry.

• When development or industry is approved, there is often insufficient environmental impact

modelling or pre-development ecological assessments so that the scale of impact (positive or

negative) is poorly understood.

• Certain industries/businesses may be incompatible with the estuary, however this is not well

understood

• Environmental degradation is difficult and costly to reverse once it has occurred, so there

should be a premium on ensuring degradation is avoided.

• Some amenity issues experienced by the community around the foreshore (e.g.

sedimentation, black mud) may be a result of previous land management practices and

therefore requires remediation works rather than a change to existing land practices.

• While improving recreational areas is welcome, these areas are poorly defined and may

overlap with important areas for rehabilitation.

• The community may not be using some foreshore areas because of inadequate facilities.


12/67


Figure 15. Fishing is a popular recreational activity around the lakes.

Figure 16. The Entrance provides signifi cant tourism potential for the estuary.


13/67


2.7 Knowledge gaps

While significant improvements in the understanding of the estuary were made with the preparation of

the estuary process study (Roberts, 2001), it was recognised that many gaps in existing data and

knowledge about estuarine processes still remained (Figures 17 & 18). In addition, perceptions exist inthe community about the so-called “health” of the estuary that do not necessarily reflect the most

recent information or management actions.

The Estuary Management Study set a number of objectives for managing knowledge gaps to aid

estuarine management (Roberts & Dickinson, 2005).

• Identify extent of information gaps and where appropriate undertake studies to improve

understanding

• Ensure community is pro-actively involved in estuarine health and management

The following issues were identified by the focus groups as being the most important out of a list of all

knowledge gap management issues (Roberts & Dickinson, 2005).

• Community scepticism about available estuarine knowledge, management intentions and

management approach

• Funding and resourcing further studies into estuarine processes, health trends and key

management questions

• Understanding of key estuarine processes is not complete

• Existing community perceptions about estuarine health

• General public are not actively informed through the most effective media channels


14/67


Figure 17. Understanding the processes that lead to w rack accumulation.

Figure 18. Investigating impacts to fisheries and threatened species.


15/67


2.8 Review of current best practice

The way in which plans are developed for the management of the coastal zone has undergone a

major transformation in the last two decades. Traditional top-down “command and control” has given

way to inclusive approaches in which managerial decisions are made through involvement of multiplestakeholders. It is widely accepted that good planning needs to incorporate stakeholder values, good

science and economic valuation (Gregory & Wellman, 2001). The earliest illustration of this was the

introduction in 1987 of the National Estuary Programme (NEP) in the USA. This programme facilitates

cooperation between diverse stakeholders in particular estuaries but with a catchment focus. There

are now 28 estuaries in the programme and research has shown that conflict resolution is significantly

more successful in estuaries participating in the NEP than in others (Lubell, 2004).

In the early 1990’s the principle of “inclusivity” was promoted in Europe through a programme funded

by the European Commission to demonstrate the advantages of integrated coastal zone management

(ICZM). This approach not only facilitates the integration of the activities of diverse management

authorities, but provides a framework for broad participation by business, conservation groups and the

wider community. The programme resulted in the introduction of ICZM across the European Union in

2002 (UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2006). There are now numerous

estuary management initiatives in the United Kingdom, for example, that embody ICZM principles with

local “ownership” and community participation in management, e.g. Humber Estuary Shoreline

Management Plan (Winn et al., 2003) and Western Yar Estuary Management Plan (Isle of Wight

Council, 2004).

Another feature of recent environmental management plans is the recognition of the need for adaptive

management that is resilient in the face of changing physical and socio-economic conditions (Berkes

& Seixas, 2005; Folke et al., 2005). In practice, this requires periodic review and re-formulation of

objectives and strategies.

In Australia, estuary management plans now invariably involve broad consultation and embody

stakeholder values and adaptive management. Good examples include the Gippsland Coastal Action

Plan (Gippsland Coastal Board, 2002), the Integrated South-East Coastal Management Strategy

(Tasmanian Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment, 2002), and the Wellstead

Estuary Management Plan (WA Department of Environment, 2005).

In NSW, waterway planning studies of major estuaries in the nineteen seventies and early eighties

were focussed on publicly identified problems like bank erosion, lack of foreshore recreation facilities

and particularly on boating needs including launching sites, shoaling and ocean entrances. While

generally successful from an engineering viewpoint, they did not address that critical balance sought

in present day EMP's between anthropogenic and ecological needs. Technical input was limited to

coastal engineering and did not include ecological, economic and social considerations that are

required in modern plans. Limited as those plans were, they did provide some understanding of the


16/67


physical processes in estuaries. In fact, the need for better understanding of natural estuarine systems

was identified in light of the data that was assembled as part of these studies.

One important exception to the rule in this era was in fact Tuggerah Lakes, which was recognised as a

special case as a result of its semi-eutrophic state. Tuggerah was the subject of an investigation

directed by an interdepartmental committee established by the NSW Government. That committee

commissioned more complex studies than those associated with other waterway planning exercises

that included significant scientific as well as engineering input and thereby produced a product

somewhat more akin to the EMP's that followed.

Since the NSW Government published the Estuary Management Manual in 1992, the 30 councils

located in the coastal zone have established more than eighty estuary management committees to

prepare EMP’s. So far 50 plans have been produced for NSW estuaries ranging from small

metropolitan lagoons to major systems like the Clarence River Estuary that encompasses several

council areas. Implementation of the plans is well underway and another 30 or more are, likeTuggerah Lakes, approaching completion.

While most of the EMP’s still largely comprise recommended schedules of physical works as their

dominant output, they no longer ignore ecological and catchment concerns. Examples of management

plans in NSW embodying the principles of inclusivity and environmental concern include the Lake

Macquarie EMP (Lake Macquarie City Council, 1997), Port Stephens and Myall Lakes EMP (Port

Stephens Council, 2000), Narrabeen EMP (Warringah Council, 2002), Berowra Creek EMP (Hornsby

Shire Council, 2002), Wonboyne Lake and Estuary Management Plan (Bega Valley Shire Council,

2004) and the Tweed Coast Estuaries Management Plan (Tweed Shire Council, 2004).

Many of the modern EMP’s relate to relatively small lakes or lagoons that lack the diversity of

concerns and disparate interest groups faced in preparation of the Tuggerah Lakes plan. Those that

are probably the most comparable to Tuggerah are Lake Macquarie and Lake Illawarra. The latter

received special attention and funding in the nineteen eighties, as did Tuggerah and Lake Macquarie

more recently with special NSW Government financial assistance. Of these, the Lake Macquarie EMP

provides the best guide for the Tuggerah Lakes system, firstly, because the management structure is

not embedded in a government agency, as it is for Illawarra for example and, secondly, in Lake

Macquarie the delineation of preferred actions is far more mature than the situation faced at Tuggerah

because a dedicated “Office of the Lake Macquarie and Catchment Co-ordinator” has been

established.

2.8.1 Model Estuary Management Plans, Systems and Frameworks

From the above, several attributes that constitute best practice in the development of estuary

management plans can be identified. A good plan will achieve the following objectives:

• Address all of the relevant issues currently impacting on the waterway.

•

Address all of the relevant issues likely to impact on the estuary into the foreseeable future.


17/67


• Will have all objectives based on sound scientific principles.

• Will have been formulated through a comprehensive stakeholder consolatory process.

• Should be clearly documented and set out so that its ongoing implementation is easily

understood.

• Responsibility for the implementation of the plan at both a global level and for individual

actions should be clearly defined.

Two of the more comprehensive existing estuary management plans are those formulated for Lake

Macquarie (Lake Macquarie City Council, 1997) and Berowra Creek (Hornsby Shire Council, 2002).

These plans had significant resources injected into both the process studies and the plan production

phases.

Important aspects of both plans include;

• The establishment of a vision and objectives for the management of the estuary.

• Significant emphasis on the importance of using good science to establish the need for any

particular action.

• The use of the estuary management plan production process, as detailed by the DNR Estuary

Programme Group, to produce the plan.

• The incorporation of the EMP into Councils’ overall planning processes.

• Detailed stakeholder consultation.

• Description of the existing physical and ecological systems.

• Thorough detailing of the issues facing the estuary.

• Assessment of the potential management options available to address the documented

issues.

• The establishment of a monitoring and evaluation framework for the process.

• A well set out actions document which clearly outlines issue, objective, action, source of

action, who is responsible, approximate cost, prioritisation and monitoring framework/indicators.

2.8.2 How this Estuary Management Plan meets best practice

The Tuggerah Lakes EMP is based on four main pillars: i) a clear statement of the vision and

objectives of the plan; ii) an understanding of the issues facing the estuary; iii) good scientific

information and iv) comprehensive consultation with stakeholders (Figure 19). The plan addresses the

relevant management issues through a suite of Action Plans comprising Priority Programmes, each

with a comprehensive list of Actions. The actions are the result of a thorough analysis of options


18/67


incorporating expert and community input. Close liaison with Wyong Shire Council (WSC) and

stakeholder groups ensures that the plan “belongs” to the community. Adherence to the DNR estuary

management plan production process also ensures the support of relevant government agencies. No

plan is complete without a mechanism for periodic review and assessment and this plan makes

appropriate recommendations as to how this can best be achieved. Council should be confident thatthis plan embodies all the elements characteristic of plans considered to be among the best in the

world.

Figure 19. Providing comprehensive stakeholder consu ltation and community education.


19/67


3 Planning Considerations

3.1 Stakeholders

3.1.1 Wyong Shire Counci l

Wyong Shire Council is the largest land manager in the Tuggerah Lakes catchment. In 2003/4 WSC

spent nearly $200m on key management responsibilities and a similar expenditure is forecast for the

current financial year. Of this, about $4m is expected to be spent on estuarine and catchment

management. While management of inland waterways is the responsibility of the State, WSC has for

many years undertaken remedial and maintenance works to enhance the estuarine environment. In

recent years the emphasis has been on understanding the functioning of the estuary and catchment

as an integrated ecosystem. The completion of the estuary process study was a significant step in the

move towards holistic management (Roberts, 2001).

3.1.2 Gosford-Wyong Councils Water Author ity

The GWCWA is responsible for supplying safe drinking water to the New South Wales central coast.

Their responsibilities include construction and maintenance of dams and water infrastructure such as

treatments plants. As a regulator of water flow, they have an important role in catchment

management, particularly in relation to environmental flows in Wyong and Ourimbah creeks that are

important to the wellbeing of the Tuggerah Lakes estuary.

3.1.3 Catchment Management Authoriti es

The Catchment Management Authorities Act 2003 established 13 new catchment management

authorities (CMA’s) in New South Wales to replace the catchment management boards. The Hunter-

Central Rivers Catchment Management Authority (H-CRCMA) is responsible for managing the

catchment of the Tuggerah Lakes among others. The H-CRCMA receives most of its funds from the

Commonwealth Government’s Natural Heritage trust with matching contributions (financial and in-

kind) from the State Government. Over the period from 2004 to 2007 it is expected that funds totalling

$18.7m will be made available to the H-CRCMA from these and other local sources. The H-CRCMA

has developed a Catchment Action Plan (CAP) that provides the framework within which the H-

CRCMA will collaborate with local government to achieve agreed management targets over the next

ten years (H-CRCMA Draft CAP, January 2006). The Tuggerah Lakes EMP has been developed with

the CAP in mind in order to gain maximum benefit from this collaboration.

3.1.4 NSW Government

NSW Department of Environment and Conservation (Parks and Wildlife Division)


20/67


DEC (P&W) manages two reserves within the Tuggerah Lakes catchment, Wyrrabalong National Park

and Munmorah State Conservation Area. Each has a plan of management that caters for prevention of

soil erosion, sedimentation and excess runoff and for bush regeneration and weed control (Coyners,

2004). The recent listing of saltmarsh as a threatened ecological community will increase DEC (P&W)

involvement in foreshore management around Tuggerah Lakes.

NSW Department of Environment and Conservation (Environmental Protection Authority)

The Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) has been involved with the Tuggerah Lakes

estuary through funding stormwater projects such as the Stormwater Management Plan (Dickinson,

1999) and research components of the Estuary Process Study (Roberts, 2001). WSC submits annual

State of the Environment reports to DEC. The involvement of DEC in continuing support for ongoing

data acquisition and investigations of improved managerial options is vital for the future protection of

the estuary.

NSW Maritime Authority

NSW Maritime Authority is responsible for management of navigable waters and provision of maritime

infrastructure throughout New South Wales. The Authority collaborates with WSC on issues such as

dredging of The Entrance channel and provides funds to the Council for development and

improvement of boating infrastructure. Continued cooperation between the Authority and WSC is

important for the successful implementation of the EMP.

Department of Natural Resources

The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) role in managing catchments and estuaries is mediatedlargely through local government authorities and the recently established Catchment Management

Authorities. The Tuggerah Lakes catchment falls within the boundaries of the Hunter-Central Rivers

Catchment Management Authority (see section 3.7.2).

NSW Department of Primary Industries (Fisheries)

DPI (Fisheries) is the lead agency in the conservation and management of fisheries resources. The

agency administers licensing for commercial and recreational fishing in the Tuggerah Lakes. DPI

(Fisheries) has an important role to play in the protection and management of seagrass habitats in the

estuary and close collaboration with the Estuary and Coastal Management Committee will beimportant in this regard.

NSW Department of Primary Industries (Forestry)

DPI (Forestry) operates in three forestry areas in Wyong Shire; Olney, Ourimbah and Wyong State

forests. With over 17% of the Tuggerah Lakes catchment under the control of DPI (Forestry) their role

in catchment management is significant. Although consultation between WSC and DPI (Forestry)

occurs on an ad hoc basis, the EMS noted the potential for a more formal arrangement in which DPI

(Forestry) could be included.


21/67


NSW Department of Lands

The Department of Lands owns most of the foreshore and bed of the Tuggerah Lakes estuary. As

such, it administers a wide variety of managerial activities relating inter alia to dredging, waterfront

occupancy, sport, tourism and industrial and agricultural activities.

NSW Department of Aboriginal Affairs (Aboriginal Land Council)

The Aboriginal Land Council was established by the Aboriginal Land Rights Act (1983). The Council is

empowered to undertake a number of activities pursuant to the objective of protecting the rights and

furthering the aspirations of the Aboriginal community. Collaboration with the ALC, in particular the

Darkinjung Local ALC, will be important in ensuring appropriate and sensitive management of areas of

cultural importance to native Australians.

3.1.5 Federal Government (Department of Environment and Heritage)

DEH is responsible for environmental management and policy in Australia. The role of this agency in

catchment management, although indirect, is particularly important since most the funding for the

Catchment Management Authorities comes from the DEH through its Natural Heritage Trust.

3.1.6 Contributors to Estuary Management Planning

A range of non-government organisations participated in discussions and/or made comments relating

to the Estuary Management Study and were also involved in the development of the Estuary

Management Plan. It is important that these organisations continue to be directly involved in the

finalisation of the Estuary Management Plan and the establishment of the Action Plans as appropriate.

3.2 Policies and Legislation

3.2.1 Estuary Management Policy

Estuary Management Plans are a major tool by which the objectives of the Coastal Policy are met.

The NSW Government developed the Estuary Management Policy in 1992. Specific objectives of the

Policy were:

•

the protection of estuarine habitats and ecosystems in the long-term, including maintenance ineach estuary of the necessary hydraulic regime;

• the preparation and implementation of a balanced long-term management plan for the

sustainable use of each estuary and its catchment, in which all values and uses are

considered, and which defines management strategies for:

o conservation of aquatic and other wildlife habitats

o conservation of the aesthetic values of estuaries and wetlands

o prevention of further estuary degradation


22/67


o repair of damage to the estuarine environment

o sustainable use of estuarine resources, including commercial uses and recreational

uses as appropriate.

3.2.2 Coastal Policy

The NSW Coastal Policy (1997) is the state government's policy for the management of the NSW

coastal zone. This includes the NSW Estuary Management Policy under which estuary management

plans are developed. The Coastal Policy is based on the principles of ecologically sustainable

development contained in the Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment signed in 1992 as

follows:

• conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity

• inter-generational equity

• improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms

• the precautionary principle.

The Coastal Policy lists the following pivotal goals:

• to protect, rehabilitate and improve the natural environment

• to recognise and accommodate natural processes and climate change

• to protect and enhance the aesthetic qualities of the coastal zone

• to protect and conserve cultural heritage

• to promote ecologically sustainable development and use of resources

• to provide for ecologically sustainable human settlement

• to provide for appropriate public access and use

• to provide information to enable effective management

• to provide for integrated planning and management.

3.2.3 Water Reforms

In 1997 the NSW Government announced a series of water reforms aimed at achieving clean, healthy

rivers and groundwater systems and the productive use of water by:

• better sharing of available water

• enhancing investment strategies for the rural water sector

• Reshaping how water management is delivered.


23/67


Estuary and Floodplain Management Committees play a key role in the delivery of these water

reforms. Catchment Management Authorities have now also been established by the NSW

Government to integrate natural resource management at a catchment level.

Central to the 1997 water reform package is the setting of water quality objectives and river flow

objectives. Estuary Management Committees are encouraged to develop these objectives through the

plan production process.

The water quality objectives for estuaries include the protection of:

• aquatic ecosystems

• visual amenity

• secondary contact recreation

• primary contact recreation

• aquatic foods (cooked) and commercial shellfish production.

Where possible it is recommended that local data be collected on which to base the development of

estuarine management targets and indicators.

The river flow objectives for estuaries are to:

• maintain wetland and floodplain inundation

• manage groundwater for ecosystems

• minimise effects of weirs and other structures

• maintain or rehabilitate estuarine processes and habitats.

Specific measures have been proposed to achieve these objectives which include the maintenance of

wetland and floodplain inundation, the management of groundwater for ecosystems, the minimisation

of the effects of weirs and other structures and the maintenance or rehabilitation of estuarine

processes and habitats.

All of these objectives and measures are relevant to the management of estuaries and should be

incorporated into the goals, objectives, strategies and actions of the Estuary Management Plan.

3.2.4 Summary of Government Polic ies

Federal and State Governments administer a number of policies that have some relevance for the

Tuggerah Lakes estuary and its catchment. A summary of the more relevant ones is provided in Table

4.


24/67


Table 4. Related Commonwealth , State and Local Government Policy

Jurisdiction Formal Name Descript ion

National WaterReform Framework -Council of AustralianGovernments, 1994

This framework relates to the management, use, protectionand, where necessary, restoration of health of waterresources and water dependent ecosystems.

Wetlands Policy ofthe Commonwealth of Australia, 1997

The purpose of this policy is to integrate wetland managementwithin the broader context of environmental management, withthe goal of repairing and managing wetlands wisely.

National Strategy forEcologicallySustainableDevelopment, 1992

This Strategy sets out principles and objectives for achievingecologically sustainable development in Australia.

National Strategy forthe Conservation of

Australia'sBiodiversity, 1996

The strategy sets out principles that underpin objectives andactions that are required to protect Australia's biodiversity.

National Principles forthe Provision of Waterfor Ecosystems, 1996

This policy aims to sustain and, where necessary, restoreecological processes and biodiversity of water-dependantecosystems by ensuring the provision of water forecosystems.

National WaterQuality ManagementStrategy, 1992

The objective of this strategy is to achieve sustainable use ofthe nation's surface and groundwater resources by protectingand enhancing their quality while maintaining economic andsocial development.

National Dryland

Salinity Programme,1993

Programme to prevent dryland salinity.

National Principlesand Guidelines forRangelandsManagement, 1999

Provides for sustainable management of Australia'srangelands.

National Action Planfor Salinity and WaterQuality, 2000

Addresses the issue of salinity and water quality in priorityareas.

Natural Heritage Trust(extension 2002-

2007)

The Trust aims to stimulate regional activities to conserve,repair and use sustainably Australia's natural resources.

Rivers, coasts and wetlands are a major focus.

Commonwealth

National Land andWater Resources Audit, 1997

Comprehensive nationwide appraisal of Australia's land, waterand vegetation resources.

New SouthWales

NSW Coastal Policy,1997

Environmentally sustainable development of the coast throughwater quality management, regulation, protection, restoration,State Environmental Planning Policy No. 14 - CoastalWetlands (SEPP14), State Environmental Planning Policy No.26, conservation, reserve systems, Acid Sulphate Soilmanagement, planning, cultural heritage protection,monitoring research & management.


25/67


Jurisdiction Formal Name Descript ion

NSW EstuaryManagement Policy,1992

A component policy of the NSW State Rivers and EstuariesPolicy 1993 for the protection and management of estuaries.

NSW Fisheries Policyand Guidelines - Aquatic HabitatManagement andFish Conservation,1999

Provides background material and description of fish habitatsand resources, relevant policies and legislation. Identifiesactivities that impact on aquatic habitats, complianceactivities, guidelines for mitigating impacts, conservationactivities and appropriate environmental assessment.

NSW GroundwaterDependentEcosystems Policy -draft

Protection of groundwater dependent ecosystems, includinggroundwater dependent wetlands. Applies five managementprinciples covering values, extraction, quality, precautionaryprinciple and appropriate use and development.

NSW Weirs Policy,1997

Aimed at halting and where possible reducing andremediating the environmental impact of weirs. Eight

management principles outline construction, removal,modification, regulation, maintenance, riparian protection,rehabilitation and respect for the impact of weirs.

NSW State Riversand Estuaries Policy,1993

Developed for the improved management of rivers andestuaries and their floodplains. The policy sets out sixprinciples for sustainable management.

NSW WetlandsManagement Policy,1996

Sets out the objectives and nine management principles forthe management of wetlands. Overseen by the NSW StateWetland Action Group (SWAG), a whole-of-governmentcommittee.

State Environmental

Planning Policy No.14 (SEPP14) -Coastal Wetlands,1985

Protects mapped wetlands in the coastal zone of NSW

(outside the Sydney metropolitan region). Requiresdevelopment consent for the clearing, draining or filling ofwetlands, or levee construction.

State EnvironmentalPlanning Policy No.19 (SEPP19) -Bushland in Urban Areas, 1986

Protection of natural bushland in local government areaslisted in the schedule, which are reserved for public openspace purposes. Development consent must be obtainedbefore bushland is disturbed.

State EnvironmentalPlanning Policy No.44 (SEPP44) - KoalaHabitat, 1995

Protection of Koala habitat, including Swamp Mahogany,commonly associated with wetlands. The policy applies to thelocal government areas within the known geographic range ofKoalas. Councils may not issue development consent withoutinvestigating core Koala habitat.

3.2.5 Legislation

Related Legislation administered by the Department of Natural Resources includes:

• Catchment Management Authorities Act 2003 No 104

• Coastal Protection Act 1979 No 13

• Dams Safety Act 1978 No 96

• Farm Water Supplies Act 1946 No 22


26/67


• Forestry and National Park Estate Act 1998 No

• Hunter Water Act 1991 No 53, Part 5, Division 8

• Irrigation Areas (Reduction of Rents) Act 1974 No 83

• Native Vegetation Act 2003 No 103

• Native Vegetation Conservation Act 1997 No 133

• Natural Resources Commission Act 2003 No 102, Part 3

• Rivers and Foreshores Improvement Act 1948 No 20

• Soil Conservation Act 1938 No 10

• Water Act 1912 No 44

• Water Management Act 2000 No 92

3.3 Funding Bodies and Opportunities

There are a range of possible funding sources to assist in the implementation of Estuary ManagementPlans.

3.3.1 State Funding (Agencies)

The Department of Natural Resources and NSW Maritime Authority administer a number of

programmes at a State Level, which are relevant to estuaries and generally available on a 50:50

basis.

• The DNR Estuary Management Programme provides technical advice, data collection and

funding assistance for estuary management plan development. Actions flowing from the plansmay also be funded on a 50:50 basis.

• The DNR Waterways Infrastructure Development Programme provides technical advice and

funding assistance for works to improve the recreational amenity of the waterways such as

boat launching ramps, public wharves and jetties, dredging, and foreshore amenities. These

can be up to 100% of project costs.

• The DNR Coastal Management Programme provides technical advice, data collection and

funding for the design and construction of works that conserve or improve beaches and public

reserves and for coastal studies and coastline management plans.

• The DNR Floodplain Management Programme provides technical advice, data collection and

funding assistance. Projects can include studies and works that reduce the impact of flooding

and flood liability.

• The Waterways Asset Development and Maintenance Programme (WADAMP, NSW

Waterways) provides funding for works to improve the amenity and management of

waterways. Funding is usually 50% of the total project costs. Projects such as wharves, jetties

and seawalls can be funded under this programme.


27/67


3.3.2 State Funding (H-CRCMA)

The Hunter-Central Rivers Catchment Management Authority (H-CRCMA) has produced a draft

Catchment Action Plan (CAP) to guide investment in catchment management over the next ten years.

Management targets in the CAP include the following;

• Enhance and protect wetlands • Urban stormwater management

• Manage nutrient runoff • Enhance foreshore vegetation

• Protect native riparian vegetation • Regenerate native riparian vegetation

• Instream and foreshore stabilisation • Rehabilitate acid sulphate soils

• Environmental management systems • Effluent management

• Floodgate management • Treat weeds

• Treat animal pests • Restore fish passage

• Erosion and sediment control, roads • Revegetate highly erodible soils

• Stabilise actively eroding soils • Sustainable grazing management

• Protect marine habitat • Threatened species work

• Enhance marine shorelines • Restore instream habitat

The Tuggerah Lakes Estuary Management Study (Roberts & Dickinson, 2005) was based on the

former Central Coast Catchment Blueprint, which was subsequently rolled into the new H-CRCMA and

its CAP. As a result of this framework, these management targets overlap considerably with the

actions listed in this plan. The H-CRCMA should be seen as the significant partner when sourcingfunds for the implementation of the Estuary Management Plan.

3.3.3 Federal Funding

The Commonwealth Government Natural Heritage Trust (NHT) provides funding to projects which

address the causes of environmental and natural resource degradation. Relevant NHT programs

include:

• The Bushcare Programme • The National Landcare Programme

•

The National Rivercare Programme•

The Endangered SpeciesProgramme

• The National Wetlands Programme • The Fisheries Action Programme

• The Marine Species Protection Programme • Coastcare

• The Coastal and Marine PlanningProgramme

• The Capacity Building Programme

• Work for the Dole • Green Corps

• The Coastal Monitoring and Vulnerability Assessment Programme


28/67


3.4 Management Framework

3.4.1 Adaptive Management & ISO14001

Adaptive Management

Adaptive management is the incorporation of the scientific method (experiments) into a management

framework (policy decisions) (Aldridge et al., 2004). Adaptive management is a challenging blend of

scientific research, monitoring and practical management that allows for experimentation and provides

the opportunity to “learn by doing” (USEPA, 2000). Underwood (1999) made the observation that

rather than competing with one another, the adaptive management logic and the scientific hypothesis

logic mirror one another at key stages of their respective processes. Adaptive management is different

from reactive management in that the latter is often unreplicated and lacks statistically valid

experimental design, often producing unreliable information (Hurlbert, 1984; Wilhere, 2002). It is alsodifferent from passive adaptive management which involves long-term monitoring and learning from a

gradually evolving management strategy (Walters, 1986). This process often becomes reactive trial-

and-error management when funds committed to monitoring are removed. If processes other than

management are causing the variability (i.e. environmental variability like weather patterns), it can

make causal relationships difficult to discern (Aldridge et al., 2004; Bormann et al., 1999).

Adaptive management is not without its problems:

• The main reason for failure is that the process rarely progresses from the model development

stage to the design and implementation of field experiments. Walters (1997) suggests thatexperiments are often opposed by people protecting self-interests in management

bureaucracies and proponents of adaptive management need to be forceful and expose these

groups and their interests to public scrutiny.

• Adaptive management requires effective implementation of experiments, which may be

expensive or risk-prone compared with baseline options (Walters, 1997). Public agencies by

nature are risk averse and manage for the status quo (Halbert, 1993).

• The information feedback loop is broken, meaning learning is inhibited and there is no

evolution of management policies. This loop typically is broken because managers are looking

(by necessity) for short-term responses and feedback from management policies (Moir &

Block, 2001).

Adaptive co-management

Traditionally, adaptive management rests with ecosystem managers in a government framework. It

does not couple local knowledge to ecosystem management and environmental feedback. Adaptive

co-management combines the “dynamic learning” characteristic of adaptive management with the

“linkage” characteristic of co-operative management and with collaborative management (Olsson et

al., 2004). It is a relatively new concept that extends the adaptive management process to include


29/67


localised implementations and user groups. This is particularly important for the Tuggerah Lakes

system where user groups (e.g. commercial fishermen) have significant local knowledge and

experience that would be useful in formulating, trialling and evaluating management approaches.

Aside from making the adaptive management process more robust, adaptive co-management

increases the level of ownership felt by the respective user groups. In some cases, this sense of

ownership has seen local users develop ecosystem management practices and evaluation techniques

that transcend administrative boundaries. There are 7 principles that support the development of co-

management systems for ecosystems:

• Enabling legislation that creates social space for ecosystem management

• Funds for responding to environmental change and for remedial action

• Ability for monitoring and responding to environmental feedbacks

• Information flow and social networks for ecosystem management

• Combining various sources of information for ecosystem management

• Sense-making for ecosystem management

• Arenas of collaborative learning for ecosystem management

The Tuggerah Lakes Estuary Management Plan is well placed to incorporate adaptive co-

management as elements of the above principles are embedded within it.

ISO 14001

The environmental performance of an organisation is of increasing importance to internal and external

stakeholders. Achieving sound environmental performance requires organisational commitment to a

systematic approach and to continual improvement of the environmental management system (EMS).

ISO 14001 is an international standard for the development and implementation of an EMS. It is

supported by IS0 14004 and has five key principles:

1. Commitment and policy

An organisation should define its environmental policy and ensure commitment to its EMS.

2. Planning

An organisation should formulate a plan to fulfil its environmental policy.

3. Implementation

For effective implementation, an organisation should develop the capabilities and support

mechanisms necessary to achieve its environmental policy, objectives and targets.

4. Measurement and evaluation

An organisation should measure, monitor and evaluate its environmental performance.

5. Review and improvement


30/67


An organisation should review and continually improve its environmental management

system, with the objective of improving its overall environmental performance.

3.4.2 Gap analysis

In reviewing both Adaptive Management and IS0 14001 principles, it is possible to identify areaswhere an estuary management plan for Tuggerah Lakes could be improved.

1. Development of an estuary management policy

Wyong Shire Council has taken an active role in the management of the estuary for many

years. This Estuary Management Plan is a commitment to continue to look after the estuary

and its catchment. However, the organisation does not have an overarching policy that sets

boundaries for what it will and won’t do in terms of estuary management. This makes it difficult

to set limits on expenditure and activities and consequently makes long-term plans such as

this estuary management plan less certain. This is the reason it is set as the first of the ISO

14001 principles. An estuary policy would make Council’s commitment to estuary

management transparent and accountable. This will be increasingly important should

additional public money be put towards the management of the lakes.

2. Commitment to adaptive management and co-management

Traditionally, estuary management plans stop at the planning and implementation phase

(Principles 2 and 3) and fail to recognise the importance of continuing to measure, evaluate,

review and improve (Principles 4 and 5). Council has spent significant time and money in

researching some key estuarine processes, but has not traditionally evaluated or modified its

approach on the basis of the information it receives. Additionally, estuarine management has

not done a good job of respecting and engaging with knowledgeable local user/interest

groups. It is recommended that the implementation of the plan be firmly placed within a

framework that makes adaptive management and co-management explicit.

3.4.3 Linking to key Council documents

Council’s core business is conducted through the use of a number of management documents and

landuse planning instruments (Table 5). The Estuary Management Plan should link to these

documents in order to embed estuary management as part of Council’s core business.


31/67


Table 5. Outline of key Council documents

Management Documents

Council Management Plan This is the primary document that describes Council’splan for operations in the Shire in a financial year.

Substantial commitments to estuary managementshould be announced here as well as performance inprevious years.

Council Policies Policies should be updated or where necessary,created to reflect Council’s position on importantestuary and catchment management issues. Thismakes the position explicit and more likely to bereflected in how the whole of Council operates.

Department Business Plans These plans describe the responsibilities and budgetsfor Council departments. It is recommended that theestuary/catchment management commitments ofCouncil departments be expressed here. Annual

projects related to the estuary should be budgeted here.Cultural Plan Council has a Cultural Plan that aims to create a

“cultural focus” for the Shire. Given that the estuaryforms a key part of the identity of the region, links shouldbe made with the Cultural Plan to create a positiveimage and encourage people back to the lakes.

Stormwater Management Plan The SMP sets Council’s stormwater managementagenda. Historically it has been a strategic documentaimed at improving stormwater management across theorganisation. Council is probably in a position now, todirect the SMP in a more action oriented way. Thiswould be an excellent vehicle for delivering the

stormwater management improvements outlined in thisEMP.

Operational Plans Operational Plans include things like maintenanceregimes and could include Seagrass harvesting plans.These plans could be harnessed by an estuary managerto direct Council efforts in ways that help the estuaryoverall.

Procedure Manuals These documents instruct outdoor staff in the methodsthey should use when undertaking tasks like maintainingstormwater traps, reserves, and operating dredges andseagrass harvesters. They present an opportunity for theEstuary Manager to improve the operations of Council

staff, which are often undertaken in public view. Poorpractices can undermine confidence in Council’scommitment to estuary management.

Landuse Plans

Wyong Local Environment Plan (LEP) This is the primary landuse planning document inCouncil. It designates what constitutes appropriate useof land including setting land aside for conservation,development and recreation. There is potential for theforeshore areas to be targeted under the LEP anddesignated as either recreation or conservation areas.This will give some certainty to future management of


32/67


Management Documents

the foreshores.

Development Control Plans (DCP) DCP’s are plans that control development activity in theShire. Engineering Guidelines for development andWater Sensitive Urban Design are both examples ofguidelines that have been turned into DCP’s. Whererobust management of development is required toprotect the estuary, the estuary manager should workwith planners to create DCP’s that aid the long-termmanagement of the estuary.

Plans of Management Individual plans of management can be very useful fordescribing Council’s vision for managing public land.This is a model that could be used to manage significantwetlands, catchment habitats, recreation on the estuary,and general foreshore management. Where acommunity ownership model is proposed for managing aparticular site, often the plan of management is the first

requirement.

Consideration should be given to linking to key documents of external stakeholders to ensure that

estuarine management responsibilities are carried through to their core business as well.


33/67


4 Developing the Plan

The estuary management plan has been written in close consultation with Wyong Shire Council as the

principal catchment and estuarine manager. There have been two significant influences on the

development of the plan. One of the first tasks in developing the plan was to provide detailed costs for

the recommendations from the Estuary Management Study (Roberts & Dickinson, 2005). The second

main influence was engaging with the range of stakeholders to better understand their needs and

hopes for managing the estuary in the future. The importance of these influences is discussed below.

4.1 Budget estimates and estuary funding

Council has long recognised that improving estuarine management will require significant increases in

funding. While some funding is expected from the State and Federal governments, it is clear that

ratepayers will need to make additional contributions in the form of a rate rise or levy. Council wants to

begin implementing the estuary management plan in the 06/07 financial year and as such a levy or

rate rise would need to be in place by then. The Council Management Plan is developed in March

each year and publicly exhibited for 8 weeks prior to adoption by the end of the financial year in June.

Council required detailed estimates of likely estuarine management programmes in order to document

the levy/rate rise in the Council Management Plan. To meet this commitment, a budget estimates

report (Dickinson et al., 2006) was prepared and submitted to Council in February 2006. The

estimates are based on the recommended priority programmes that were identified in the Estuary

Management Study (Roberts & Dickinson, 2005).

These programmes were expanded to include the detailed actions in this Estuary Management Plan.

The actions and associated costs were refined in a workshop with key estuarine managers held earlier

in 2006. The report (Dickinson et al., 2006) documents anticipated estuarine management expenditure

over a 5-year period. Existing expenditure was estimated at $2.4 million p.a. for programmes related

to estuarine management. Projected expenditure was expected to increase by an estimated $6.9

million p.a. to a total of $9.3 million p.a.

Council has two main ways of raising revenue from ratepayers; a special levy or a general rate rise. A

special levy is generally a temporary levy on top of ordinary rates and may have a sunset clause. It is

usually reserved for special on-ground works or activities. It is common practice to set spending

criteria and establish a Committee to oversee the allocation and expenditure of levy funds. This can

make it difficult to apply the funding to areas that may not fit within the defined categories (such as

additional staffing to cope with the extra workload associated with spending large sums of money).

Another difficulty associated with levies is that they are often structured in a way that limits spending

on maintenance (however the proposed stormwater levy allows for maintenance), which is counter-

intuitive considering that the levy often generates large amounts of on-ground works with a long

lifespan and maintenance demands.


34/67


By comparison, a general rate rise tends to be adopted without the same set of constraints or

oversight. This makes it easier to vary how and where the funding is spent. It can also include

increased staff and maintenance levels which helps support implemented on-ground works. Without

the appropriate oversight however, it is conceivable that funding could be distributed to other Council

operations unrelated to estuarine management (eg. roads, sporting fields etc). This could make thecommunity more sceptical of a general rate rise.

Given the perceived importance of stormwater management to the overall health of the estuary,

Council decided to implement a stormwater-based levy that can be used to target elements of

estuarine management that are related to stormwater. This levy is expected to generate approximately

$1.5 million annually.

4.2 Consulting with stakeholders

The consultation programme that has been implemented for this management plan is described indetail in Muston (2006). The main elements of this report are summarised below.

Exchange of information between stakeholders and plan makers is fundamental to the NSW

Government’s estuary management planning process. Interaction between Wyong Council and others

who have interests and responsibilities in estuarine management has been ongoing since 1997. Its

form depends on the stage in the planning process:

• Council - the elected local representatives oversee, review and adopt the plan (ongoing role);

• Tuggerah Lakes Estuary Management Committee – involves stakeholders with specific

interests in estuarine managerial outcomes in planning, monitoring and reviewing the

Management Plan (ongoing role);

• Reference Groups – specific interest clusters who meet for focussed discussion (formed

during the Estuary Management Study stage and retained for the Estuary Management Plan

stage);

• Inclusion of objectives and principles that are the product of negotiation or consultation for

other programmes;

• Members of the general community – alerted by public notices and/or public exhibitions of thestage of the planning and opportunities to make submissions.

4.2.1 Objectives

The consultation programme aims to invite information from a range of interest groups. The

consultation objectives underpinning the programme were set as:

• broad stakeholder understanding of the final stage of the plan making process;


35/67


• broad stakeholder understanding of the consequences of implementing the Estuary

Management Plan;

• dissemination of balanced, objective information to assist stakeholders in understanding the

problems, alternatives and opportunities associated with managing the Tuggerah Lakes

estuary;

• opportunities for interested stakeholders to exchange information and opinion relevant to

estuarine management;

• stakeholder feedback received by the project team and addressed where relevant during the

plan making process;

• current environmental, economic and social issues identified and addressed in the Estuary

Management Plan;

• the draft Estuary Management Plan accessible to stakeholders for review and response.

4.2.2 Consulting Tools

The communication tools were designed to be widely accessible and to act as alerts that final written

submission is invited. In this last stage of the plan-making, one-on-one discussions are confined to

workshops with the three Reference Groups (Business, Community and Technical), Estuary

Management Committee and Council meetings.

General community – Print media – Alerting tool

Print media was chosen as the main vehicle for developing community-wide awareness that the

estuarine management planning process is drawing to a close. A print media schedule of weekly

advertorial and media releases that were focused on the 5 key management themes raised

community awareness. The print media carried advertisements about how to access displays and

exhibition documents to alert people who wanted to make final submissions prior to Council’s adoption

of the estuary management plan. The response to the media advertorial and advertisements was

monitored to ensure that responses were collected and fed into the planning process.

General community – Council website – Alert and feedback tool

Council’s website was used as the repository of all documents related to the planning process and

another vehicle for raising community awareness that the estuarine management planning process

was drawing to a close. The texts for the media advertorials, displays and exhibition of documents

were made available. A link was also added to the website to provide email access for submission of

opinion direct to Council. Responses were collected.

General community – Static display – feedback tool

Static displays were the third communication tool used for raising general community awareness that

the estuarine management planning process was drawing to a close. Static displays were positioned


36/67


in three shopping centres (Tuggerah Westfield, Lake Haven and Bay Village) and Council Chambers

(a total of 4 display locations). The displays contained a central panel that would remain on display for

information related to the planning timeline and advising how to submit feedback. Two additional

panels were produced that carried coloured photographs and text that amplified the managerial

outcomes with information summarised on the central panel. The displays were staffed on an openday enable an exchange of information and collection of suggestions and issues.

Future estuary managers: local schools

The estuary plan and its contents were considered too complex to act as an ongoing common focus

for community participation in future management of the estuary. Historically, many of the messages

exchanged within the community about the status of the estuary are negative and do not encourage

optimism and participation. This is a common situation that has been overcome in other locations by

community-wide adoption of a symbol or ‘human scale’ icon; something that can be easily

remembered and easily associate with managerial successes. To this end, local primary schools havebeen engaged in a colouring competition that will contribute to the development of an icon relevant to

the Tuggerah Lakes, the seahorse. The finalist’s work was incorporated into the final management

plan.

Structured discussions – focus planning workshops

Four structured planning workshops were undertaken to discuss the options/actions/consequences

that should be included in the Management Plan. The reference groups established during

development of the estuary management study were used and augmented where appropriate

(representation in these groups is shown in Appendix B) and included:

• Technical working group comprising Council staff and State agency representatives

• Business working group comprising members of the Chambers of Commerce and significant

employers in Wyong Shire

• Community working group comprising representatives from indigenous, environmental and

recreational groups.

• Tuggerah Lakes Estuary, Floodplain and Coastline Management Committee

The structure of the workshops encouraged identification of ecological, social and economic outcomes

sought from future management of the estuary.


37/67


4.2.3 Outcomes from pre-plan consultation

Community Feedback – Shopping Centre Open Days

There were a number of issues raised by the visitors to the displays at Bay Village, Lakehaven, and

Westfield Tuggerah Shopping Centres. These are summarised in Table 6 below:

Table 6. Feedback from the Community – Shopping Centre Visits

Issue Comment

• suggestions for removing it from the foreshore (RockyPoint and Prawn beach featured prominently indiscussions)

Wrack/foreshore management:

• people have a desire to use the foreshore to accesslakes, but feel they can't because of conditions

• suggestions from some lakes users that commercial

fishing is removing too many fish from the Lakes

Commercial Fishing

• local fishers seem concerned that commercial fishinggear rips out seagrass which then floats to the shore andmay exacerbate the ooze problem. They also suggestedthat this might increases seagrass loss

Entrance Management • some residents have suggested that Council needs tokeep the Entrance open permanently and place anydredged sand from the channel on the south sideinstead of north side of The Entrance

Levy • people seemed generally happy with the work proposedunder the levy. Others suggested they would be happy

to pay more given the proposed work programme.Streambank Rehabilitation • some people suggested that a significant increase in this

rehab was needed especially in the estuarine sections ofthe rivers and creeks

Community Feedback – Reference Group

A community reference group workshop was held on the 5th April 2006 (its membership is shown in

Appendix B). The issues in Table 7 were raised and suggestions made to strengthen the effectiveness

of the EMP.

Table 7. Feedback from the Community – Reference Groups

Issue Comment

Public accessibility to andcomprehension of the EMP.

• The estuary management outcomes were generallysupported by the participants.

• The part of the draft EMP reviewed by the referencegroup was considered by them to be communicated at ascale and complexity that made it difficult for them torelate to the contents of the plan and the form of theoverall management initiative.

• In response, a recommendation that emerged from


38/67


Issue Comment

within the group was that the local community would findit easier to relate to the EMP if it could becommunicated to them at a local level; described bysome as a “sub-catchment”, “precinct”, “village”, “wherewe live” level.

• The discussion also suggested that Council work groupsshould operate on a precinct basis so they develop agreater sense of responsibility for their actions atparticular locations and a greater understanding of thatpart of the lake, its history and the managementoutcomes sought for it.

Integration with other plans thatinfluence the condition of TuggerahLakes or processes that impactupon it.

• Suggestions that the EMP needed to operate in anintegrated way with other plans that control Counciloperations

Effective adaptive management

promoted by flexibility in the EMP.

• The plan should be flexible enough that new information

would trigger modification of the management activities,and new technologies could be embraced that wouldenhance estuary management outcomes.

• Review of the EMP was suggested to be often enoughto take advantage of new information, a 2-5 year reviewcycle was mentioned.

• Comment was made that the 5-year plan recommendedby the draft EMP for stormwater remediation upgradeswas too short a time period.

Consistent performance of allwhose activities influence thecondition of the estuary and its

foreshore areas.

• Participants considered that Council staff or itscontractors, developers and land care groups hadundertaken activities that compromised the condition of

the estuary.

• In some cases the activities were considered to haveeroded the benefits already gained from volunteer andCouncil’s own rehabilitation efforts in some areas.

• There was a strong call for ongoing training of all peoplewhose activities occur on, or impact on, the foreshoreareas of the lakes.

Council capacity to implement theEMP.

• Doubts were expressed by some participants aboutCouncil’s capacity to implement the EMP successfully.

• This discussion was extended by some to suggest thatan ‘independent’ body should be formed to hold

responsibility and accountability for the outcomes itachieved through allocation of estuary managementfunding and implementation of programs.

Priority setting. • The apparent complexity of the draft EMP generatedmany questions about priority setting. It appeared thatparticipants needed to understand the criteria that wouldbe used to identify priority actions before they could feelcomfortable endorsing parts of the draft EMP.

• A suggestion was made that priority setting shouldinclude a geographic basis and it seemed this wouldoffer the reassurance that they sought.


39/67


Issue Comment

Involvement by residents and landcarers.

• Concern was expressed that State Governmentagencies needed to understand and become involved inthe estuary management outcomes sought in the draftEMP.

•

Concern was expressed that if this did not occur, thebenefits of the EMP could be reduced if StateGovernment agencies over ruled Council’s landmanagement and development approval decisions.

• This concern was expressed particularly in relation tomanagement strategies to protect of ecologicallysensitive areas (from the impacts of new coalmines) andpopulation strategies developed to protect the estuary.

Involvement by schools. • Awareness and involvement by primary and secondaryschool children was seen as a key to the futuresustainability of the estuary.

• It was suggested that:

o The information contained in the estuarymanagement planning documentation betransferred into curricula and project materials forlocal schools. It was suggested that the theme be“where you walk, visit, meet your friends or live” torecognise that not all of the school student livebeside the lakes.

o The curricular support materials be made localityspecific to engage more readily with the studentsand teachers.

o Incentives are developed for schools to presenttheir project activities and findings to land ‘care’

groups and in this way develop strategicrelationships between the two groups.

o Incentives are developed to encourage studentgroups to report findings of their projects andactivities to other student groups and in this waydevelop strategic relationships between the groupsfrom different areas and schools.

o Mandatory programs of study in the estuary beintroduced to in primary and secondary schools.

Involvement by businesses. • There are incentives for businesses and sporting clubs(such as bowling clubs and other sporting clubs thatmanaged playing fields) to develop and implement land

& water management plans to ensure that their activitieshave minimum impact on the estuary.

• There are incentives for companies and clubs tobecome involved, such as an “adopt a foreshore area’”program where their activities and achievements areclearly visible, promoted by the Council and rewarded.

Involvement by fisheriesstakeholders.

• Concern was expressed about impacts that trawlerfishing and fisheries bi-catch may have on the habitatvalue of the lakes.

• It was suggested that some of the fishing licence moneybe transferred to management of the estuary.

Involvement by indigenous • A suggestion was made that involvement by, and


40/67


Issue Comment

stakeholders. strategic partnering with, indigenous groups wouldencourage a beneficial transfer of indigenous land careethics of responsibility for the condition of the land.

Activity specific. • That the Council review the design of its gross pollutant

traps because it was considered that some don’t workand/or represent unattractive features on the lakeforeshore.

• That the foreshore designated recreation area activitiesrecommended in the EMP address the Long Jettyforeshores a matter of priority.

• That a full time waterways officer be appointed forTuggerah Lakes support Priority Program # 1 in thedraft EMP (stream bank rehabilitation).

• Introduction of flow measurement capabilities into allnew stormwater outlets on the lake foreshores andretrofit to existing ones, in order to support the Council’s

stormwater control capacity.• Increased funding and increase in the range of dredging

activities on the basis that the present benefits fromdredging was considered to be limited.

• Also on this topic, it was suggested that a study be doneof the return movement of dredged sand into the lake instorm events. A suggestion was also made to place thedredged sand on the beaches.

• Guidance about where to place sediment dredged atriver mouths was suggested to be included in the EMP.

• Increase in the level of community involvement inWaterWatch water quality testing to increase awarenessabout stormwater control devices and the quality of thewater entering the lakes via such devices.

• Measurement of flows entering the lakes so that arecord of flows can be obtained to support identificationof appropriate environmental flows.

• Inquires were made abou